|
|
Post by awesomo on Jun 30, 2024 14:38:02 GMT -5
That’s great and all, but you don’t consider rising costs at all in your calculation which makes your earnings numbers wildly overestimated. How do you figure? You use earnings per share to arrive at your projected share price. Earnings isn’t revenue. You have to factor in costs. No company can grow revenue from $250M to $850M and maintain the same costs. |
|
|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Jun 30, 2024 15:00:49 GMT -5
Normally when you increase volume ... your cost per unit decreases. Says an accountant ...
|
|
|
|
Post by awesomo on Jun 30, 2024 15:26:47 GMT -5
Normally when you increase volume ... your cost per unit decreases. Says an accountant ... If you assume your costs don’t increase at all you’re assuming your cost per unit goes to 0. |
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Jun 30, 2024 17:31:05 GMT -5
Normally when you increase volume ... your cost per unit decreases. Says an accountant ... But your number of units increases. Says a mathematician… |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Jul 1, 2024 7:02:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jul 1, 2024 7:40:36 GMT -5
You use earnings per share to arrive at your projected share price. Earnings isn’t revenue. You have to factor in costs. No company can grow revenue from $250M to $850M and maintain the same costs. I invited criticism and yours is fair. Given current run rates for operational expenses, can you estimate a run rate for the additional costs for manufacturing and selling clofazimine and nintedanib? I ignored clofazimine because the patient population is so small, and I agree I did not include any estimate of costs for nintedanib and increased sales of Afrezza. I assumed it would be $200M to $300M which would not make a big dent in EPS if MNKD was bringing in $2.9B to $3.5B. That’s why I called it a back o’ the napkin estimate, but I have no concerns if folks want to try to establish a better estimate for 6 years out. I tried to present what I thought was plausible and arguably conservative, but you’re right, I gave no estimate of capital and operational expenses, and those could be significant if for example MannKind needed to double or triple manufacturing capacity. I don’t anticipate that for clofazimine or nintedanib, but Afrezza might conceivably strain manufacturing capcity if it started to get a sizable portion of the US and Indian markets. I want to highlight the nintedanib DPI market estimates provided by MannKind of $7.5B in 2030. Nintedanib DPI would be a direct competitor to Ofev from Boehringer Ingelheim which is their 2nd largest revenue source (behind Jardiance). I assume the $7.5B number is not simply MannKind making up numbers but based in some reality associated with BI’s sales trend and estimates. There is no way a company the size of BI will simply standby glibly watching MannKind develop a Tyvaso DPI-like product which is quite possibly superior to their Ofev and consume the majority of their current and projected revenue from Ofev. This means there could very well be a partnership offered if the Phase 1 trial results warrant it. This is exactly what happened with treprostinil on TechnoSphere (Tyvaso DPI). Since this is sunny day musing, I’ll assume Phase 1 trial demonstrates everything needed to convince BI to take action. It is not a big leap to think they might want to do the same thing UTHR did and protect their revenues by marketing Ofev DPI manufactured by MannKind. It keeps MannKind a pipeline-centric company and could mean substantial upfront partnership investment, milestones, and double-digit royalties. I think a ballpark estimate of a deal would be $400M upfront, another $100M in milestones, and 25% royalties. That could still yield nearly $2B in royalties for 2030 and beyond. What do others think? |
|
|
|
Post by hopingandwilling on Jul 2, 2024 9:43:00 GMT -5
I stepped away from posting here and commenting for the last few months. My commentary was not being appreciated and the audience here continues to decline with only a handful of the original contributors still offering commentary.
But there are still those willing to grasp and twist anything that mentions MannKind, by name, into being the Holy Grail and it will bring forth great riches to those owning their stock.
The recent data release comparing Afrezza to the “usual care—aka- injected insulin”, is the classic example of those willing to distort the data as being positive for Afrezza. The reality in the data merely confirms what has been known for more than two decades---inhaled insulin does not provide results that exceed what injected insulin provides. It is laughable for those distorting this latest clinical trial data— since, in it, they admit that for some trial patients, their clinical results worsen when they switch to using Afrezza.
The following are the key points that MannKind conveyed to shareholders about the data found in this comparative clinical trial.
(1) Study proves inhaled insulin is as effective as usual care (primarily automated insulin delivery pumps or multiple daily injections) for adults living with T1D meeting the primary endpoint
(2) More than 50% of subjects at the end of the study expressed an interest in continuing to use Afrezza®
(3) While more people met the glycemic target of A1c (less than 7%) with Afrezza, some subjects worsened when switching from usual care to inhaled insulin, potentially due to missing doses of inhaled insulin during the day and/or underdosing going into bedtime
Point #1—it does NOT say that Afrezza is more effective than injected insulin.
Repeat after me! ---Afrezza is insulin. Injected insulin is insulin. WHEN insulin is deposited into our circulatory system and into your blood, insulin moves throughout the body and remediates the diabetic condition being experienced by the patient. Once the insulin enters blood system---whether being initially dosed as Afrezza or injectable the remedial agent is simply insulin. And guess what---insurance companies are not keen on paying for a drug that merely carries a Mercedes logo vs a Ford Pinto insulin product.
Point #2- What MannKind is spinning is that about 50% of the trial patients clearly stated they had no desire to continue using Afrezza and will stick with their injectable. As for the other 50%, they merely expressed an interest in using. What a spin story coming from MannKind when we have more than a decade of data that clearly shows that about 75% of those who tried Afrezza refuse to refill their prescriptions. Now who wants to make a wager that those 50% expressing an interest, should they opt for Afrezza, then not be one of the 75% historically that opt not to refill their prescription?
Point #3 – This admission that clinical trial data shows that switching from injectable insulin to Afrezza worsens a patient’s condition, it was so significant that MannKind was compelled to admit this reality. It appears that MannKind have opened the door to Pandora’s Box. Would be interesting to see if the FDA will add another Black Box warning to the Afrezza prescribing label.
• Afrezza’s sales have plateaued, and revenues are merely growing based on price increases MannKind constantly raise.
• Afrezza will never achieve enough revenue/profit to justify even the current price of the shares.
• Clofazimine will never generate meaningful revenues---merely ask Novartis. If Novartis can’t market clofazimine with their massive marketing team, why would MannKind think they can market it without a sales team and marketing department? How has the numerous times of hiring and firing of the Afrezza sales team worked for MannKind? Who remembers the flying hamburger TV ads? Who remembers the actor hired to be their TV spokesperson? Who spent the money on the MannKind logo being placed on a vehicle going 200 mph on an oval track with a crowd all liquored up?
• Just for the record—over recent days and after seeing the latest clinical trial data—I have shorted a couple thousand shares of MannKind’s stock with an APS price of $5.42. It should be obvious that the latest clinical data is being valued as being worthless.
I can hardly wait for the next clinical trial to give the stockholder false hope that since Afrezza is merely insulin, just like injected insulin, their CEO has come up with a way to convert it into wine.
|
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jul 2, 2024 10:32:15 GMT -5
I wondered where the naysayers had gone. Welcome back!
It wasn't MannKind "spinning" the message about the INHALE-3 trial results. That was the top endocrinologists in the US at the most important conference on diabetes in the world.
The most important opinion from the news will be that of prescribers which is expanding based on at least one of the Key Opinion Leaders at the symposium saying they are now prescribing Afrezza for their patients based on the results she saw from the trial. We'll learn of the improvement in sales and marketing of Afrezza (or not) at the Q3 earnings call much later this year. In the meantime, you can continue to do your best to say Afrezza is bad and MannKind is moribund. I'd wish you good luck with that, but obviously that would be counter to my sentiment as a buy-and-hold investor of MNKD.
As for revenue from clofazimine and nintedanib, check out my last few posts in this thread. The world has seen what MannKind did with the Treprostinil on TechnoSphere (TreT) Phase 1 trial of what is now known as Tyvaso DPI. You should expect a similar but more lucrative opportunity will present itself if the nintedanib DPI Phase 1 trial goes well too.
|
|
|
|
Post by stella on Jul 2, 2024 10:48:04 GMT -5
I stepped away from posting here and commenting for the last few months. My commentary was not being appreciated and the audience here continues to decline with only a handful of the original contributors still offering commentary. But there are still those willing to grasp and twist anything that mentions MannKind, by name, into being the Holy Grail and it will bring forth great riches to those owning their stock. The recent data release comparing Afrezza to the “usual care—aka- injected insulin”, is the classic example of those willing to distort the data as being positive for Afrezza. The reality in the data merely confirms what has been known for more than two decades---inhaled insulin does not provide results that exceed what injected insulin provides. It is laughable for those distorting this latest clinical trial data— since, in it, they admit that for some trial patients, their clinical results worsen when they switch to using Afrezza. The following are the key points that MannKind conveyed to shareholders about the data found in this comparative clinical trial. (1) Study proves inhaled insulin is as effective as usual care (primarily automated insulin delivery pumps or multiple daily injections) for adults living with T1D meeting the primary endpoint (2) More than 50% of subjects at the end of the study expressed an interest in continuing to use Afrezza® (3) While more people met the glycemic target of A1c (less than 7%) with Afrezza, some subjects worsened when switching from usual care to inhaled insulin, potentially due to missing doses of inhaled insulin during the day and/or underdosing going into bedtime Point #1—it does NOT say that Afrezza is more effective than injected insulin. Repeat after me! ---Afrezza is insulin. Injected insulin is insulin. WHEN insulin is deposited into our circulatory system and into your blood, insulin moves throughout the body and remediates the diabetic condition being experienced by the patient. Once the insulin enters blood system---whether being initially dosed as Afrezza or injectable the remedial agent is simply insulin. And guess what---insurance companies are not keen on paying for a drug that merely carries a Mercedes logo vs a Ford Pinto insulin product. Point #2- What MannKind is spinning is that about 50% of the trial patients clearly stated they had no desire to continue using Afrezza and will stick with their injectable. As for the other 50%, they merely expressed an interest in using. What a spin story coming from MannKind when we have more than a decade of data that clearly shows that about 75% of those who tried Afrezza refuse to refill their prescriptions. Now who wants to make a wager that those 50% expressing an interest, should they opt for Afrezza, then not be one of the 75% historically that opt not to refill their prescription? Point #3 – This admission that clinical trial data shows that switching from injectable insulin to Afrezza worsens a patient’s condition, it was so significant that MannKind was compelled to admit this reality. It appears that MannKind have opened the door to Pandora’s Box. Would be interesting to see if the FDA will add another Black Box warning to the Afrezza prescribing label. • Afrezza’s sales have plateaued, and revenues are merely growing based on price increases MannKind constantly raise. • Afrezza will never achieve enough revenue/profit to justify even the current price of the shares. • Clofazimine will never generate meaningful revenues---merely ask Novartis. If Novartis can’t market clofazimine with their massive marketing team, why would MannKind think they can market it without a sales team and marketing department? How has the numerous times of hiring and firing of the Afrezza sales team worked for MannKind? Who remembers the flying hamburger TV ads? Who remembers the actor hired to be their TV spokesperson? Who spent the money on the MannKind logo being placed on a vehicle going 200 mph on an oval track with a crowd all liquored up? • Just for the record—over recent days and after seeing the latest clinical trial data—I have shorted a couple thousand shares of MannKind’s stock with an APS price of $5.42. It should be obvious that the latest clinical data is being valued as being worthless. I can hardly wait for the next clinical trial to give the stockholder false hope that since Afrezza is merely insulin, just like injected insulin, their CEO has come up with a way to convert it into wine. Thanks for your glass-half-full commentary. Aren't you the guy who insisted that MNKD using a nebulizer for clofazimine trials was an indication they didn't have any confidence in Technosphere? (please see Tyvaso DPI). Most of your previous posts have been inaccurate and FUD.
"Afrezza will never achieve enough revenue/profit to justify even the current price of the shares." MNKD current valuation/stock price is not dependent/based on current Afrezza sales. Your "absolute" comment on Afrezza's potential reveals your short inclination. We won't know Afrezza's potential until we hear about the Cipla and peds results. Then you can make such absolute statements. Hmmm let's see......Dr. Irl Hirsch or some random/anonymous guy on a message board. I'm going with Irl.
You spent a lot of time writing your insightful post. And you only shorted 2000 shares? You're a hitter and worth listening to. Kudos.
|
|
|
|
Post by sr71 on Jul 2, 2024 10:51:13 GMT -5
hopingandwilling -
There was a good opportunity to cover your shorts at $4.97 this morning.
And thank you for increasing the likelihood that near-term covered calls will expire OTM.
|
|
|
|
Post by cretin11 on Jul 2, 2024 10:57:31 GMT -5
Thanks for posting, hopingandwilling. It's valuable to see posts that aren't the usual hopium. The recent share price predictions are fun and fantastical, but balance is good for a reputable message board. Anyone truly confident in their investment shouldn't be bothered by reading the opposing viewpoint.
Also, thank you for sharing for the record your short position taken at $5.42, now we have a verified short here. So far your trade has done well, you had good timing.
|
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jul 2, 2024 12:22:11 GMT -5
Thanks for posting, hopingandwilling. It's valuable to see posts that aren't the usual hopium. The recent share price predictions are fun and fantastical, but balance is good for a reputable message board. Anyone truly confident in their investment shouldn't be bothered by reading the opposing viewpoint. Also, thank you for sharing for the record your short position taken at $5.42, now we have a verified short here. So far your trade has done well, you had good timing. I am amused you worked in a "move along, these aren't the droids we're looking for" Jedi mind trick dissuading people from reading my most recent posts in this thread on "back o' the napkin" (but I hope conservative) estimates on:
* MannKind's potential partnership opportunity with Ingelheim Boehringer for nintedanib DPI to become Ofev DPI similar to how Treprostinil on TechnoSphere became Tyvaso DPI partnered with UTHR after a successful Phase 1 trial
|
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Jul 2, 2024 21:54:41 GMT -5
I think we might be shy a few posts I would have liked to remain, but I see BD posted about a rule which says posts criticizing the moderators can be deleted by the moderators and that this thread had been locked (temporariliy), and criticism about BD in particular should be sent via DM to his boss liane. That was very forthright of BD. I don’t encourage criticism of the moderators (who are also censors) because I think the alternative is the aptly named StockTwits and the ilk such as Yahoo! Messenger (urp), et cetera, social media sites where all manner of anti-social behavior abounds to the detriment of the reader and their members. Additionally, I want to thank castlerockchris for an especially thoughtful post in the thread on the MannKind INHALE-3 symposium at the ADA conference. That post could have easily been appropriate here in this thread but I liked that castlerockchris posted it in the ADA thread where it was more germain to the topic recently posted-about here by an openly unapologetic short of MNKD shares. I don’t agree with the short investor analysis, but he inspired many good responses so all’s well that ends well. |
|
|
|
Post by uvula on Jul 2, 2024 22:45:47 GMT -5
As long as we are discussing the rules, what is the back story on this one:
8. Nudity and pornography.
8.1. Posters are not allowed to sit at the computer while naked.
|
|
|
|
Post by BD on Jul 3, 2024 5:56:39 GMT -5
Haha, the fellow who wrote all the original rules was quite a character.
|
|
